Skip to main content
Glama

Bookbrainz

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Browse

browse
Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse entities of a type filtered by a related entity. e.g. browse editions by work, works by author.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesTarget entity type
workNoWork bbid filter
limitNo1-25 (default 10)
authorNoAuthor bbid filter
offsetNo0-based offset
seriesNoSeries bbid filter
editionNoEdition bbid filter
publisherNoPublisher bbid filter
edition_groupNoedition-group bbid filter

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoTotal number of results
offsetNoOffset used in the query
entitiesNoArray of entities matching browse filter

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already provide read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive hints. Description adds the filtering-by-related-entity behavior, which is consistent with annotations but not revealing further behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with immediate purpose statement and illustrative examples, no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description and schema together cover the tool's inputs and behavior. An output schema exists (not shown), so return values are presumably documented elsewhere. Pagination via offset/limit is in schema but not elaborated in description, slightly reducing completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value through examples showing how parameters combine (e.g., work, author with limit), which clarifies the filtering semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'browse' and resource 'entities of a type filtered by a related entity', with concrete examples differentiating it from sibling tools like 'search' or 'lookup'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Clear context for use: browse by type with related-entity filtering. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives mentioned, but the purpose is distinct enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Bookbrainz toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The tool set mixes three distinct domains: BookBrainz entity access (browse, lookup, search), Pipeworx data routing (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, suggest_questions), and Polymarket betting analysis. Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the ask_pipeworx variants and the various polymarket_* tools, which an agent could easily confuse.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a readable snake_case convention. While some are single verbs (browse, lookup, search), others use compound patterns (ask_pipeworx_grounded, polymarket_edge_tracker, pipeworx_trending), and there are a few noun-first names (entity_profile, pipeworx_feedback, recent_changes). The inconsistency is minor and does not hinder readability.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, this is a large surface for a server named Bookbrainz, yet only 3 tools (browse, lookup, search) actually serve that domain. The remaining 31 tools are unrelated Pipeworx/Polymarket functionality, making the tool count inappropriate for the stated server purpose and suggesting a mislabeled or overloaded server.

Completeness2/5

The BookBrainz domain is severely incomplete: it offers read-only access (search, browse, lookup) but no create, update, or delete operations for entities. For the broader Pipeworx/Polymarket functionality, coverage is quite deep, but that is not the server's stated domain. This leaves a fundamental gap for the BookBrainz use case.

Resources